Round Peg and Round Hole Diplomacy: The Return of Professor Bolaji Akinyemi to NIIA

Bola A. Akinterinwa 

The return of Professor Akinwande Bolaji Akinyemi, CFR, PhD Oxford, FNIIA, FSSAN, FAIA, to the Nigerian Institute of International Affairs (NIIA), as Chairman of the Governing Council of the Institute, rekindles my hope of better days to come in the new Nigeria that is in the making. The return is coming on the heels of Nigeria’s Foreign Minister, Ambassador Yusuf Maitama’s submission of a new foreign policy thrust in the conduct and management of Nigeria’s foreign relations. Ambassador Tuggar has come up with the diplomacy of 4-Ds (Democracy, Demography, Development and Diaspora) and introduction of a new centre of gravity for political governance: Strategic Autonomy. The 4-Ds serve as instruments of attaining strategic autonomy, hence the thrust should be seen as a new foreign policy objective that should be constitutionalised. 

When Professor Ibrahim Gambari argued the case of foreign policy concentric circles, he underscored the aspect of operational factors by dividing the world into four major concentric circles. In the innermost circle, he put Nigeria and her immediate neighbours, because their security is intertwined. After, Ambassador Oluyemi Adeniji introduced the Constructive and Beneficial Concentricism approach, admitting Professor Gambari’s submission, but positing the need to articulate what the foreign policy focus should be in each operational area, apart from the Mission Charter of every embassy. More important, he argued that concentricism should be constructive in strategy and beneficial to all Nigerians in outcome. Today, ‘Strategic Autonomy,’ as presented by the Foreign Minister Tuggar, is the ‘fulcrum’ of the administration of President Bola Ahmed Tinubu (PBAT) and therefore constitutes the centre of gravity of all the concentric circles. 

Before now, research generally focused on Nigeria’s attitude towards the world and not focusing on how Nigeria is seen by the world. The first research leg of the quest for ‘strategic autonomy’ should be an investigation into the place of Nigeria in the foreign policy calculations of other countries of the world in order to have a better bargaining power. What is beautiful is that a former Minister of Foreign Affairs, an astute academic, and also a former Director-General of the NIIA, is appointed to chair the NIIA Governing Council. Putting round pegs into round holes is a most welcome development.

Bolaji Akinyemi and Nigeria’s Foreign Policy

Many are the ways notable people are recognised in international relations and the academic world. Professional bodies give awards to their outstanding members, such as Fellowships. Scholars can honour their own people through prizes-giving and book-Festschrift. Community leaders are rewarded with traditional chieftaincy titles. Even Government give national awards to appreciate scientific breakthroughs, contributions to societal development, awards for engagement in patriotic activities, commitment to defence of territorial integrity, etc. Even though Professor Akinyemi has been honoured with CFR (Commander of the Federal Republic), this cannot compare enough with his being one of the Darkest Academia or belonging to the Goth Academia in international relations.

A darkest academia in international relations is someone who seeks beauty out of darkest places. A darkest academia does not believe that anything can be one hundred percent bad. He or she necessarily believes that even from an African black pot, something good and positive can still be taken out of it. In fact, the historiography of Gothic Academia shows much interest in gothic studies, literature, arts, occult, poetry, music, architecture, etc., all of which are aimed at finding the best out of worst scenarios. Without any whiff of doubt, Professor Akinyemi often disagreed with any postulation that claims that Nigeria cannot make it, especially when the environment of the economy is inclement. He does not believe that Nigeria’s image in international relations cannot be considerably improved upon internationally even with a hostile environment. His belief is always that Nigerian leaders should always use whatever they have to influence international perception of Nigeria to their advantage. 

Consequently, the appointment of Professor Akinwande Bolaji Akinyemi as Chairman of the Governing Council of the NIIA cannot but lead to putting an end to whatever challenges that may be confronting the NIIA. The NIIA has generally been poorly funded like it is the case with several research institutions in Nigeria. The Institute needs at least 50 core researchers to cover the whole world, but there is no good funding for this to happen. 

In spite of the challenge of poor funding, Professor Akinyemi was still able to introduce the ‘International Dialogue Series’ to market the Institute to the world and to let the World know that the NIIA is also a market place to shop for very sagacious intellectuals. And true enough, he also introduced the ‘Ambassadors Forum’ to which Principal Representatives of foreign countries were invited to speak about their countries’ foreign policies, as well as promote the interests of their countries. NIIA Research Fellows, senior members of staff, and registered Members of the Institute were always invited to participate and invited Ambassadors always felt free to speak in the mania of the Chatham House. Additionally, Professor Akinyemi created the Nigerian Forum in the mania of the Chatham House. Seasoned scholarly opinions were and still are published in it with or without references. 

After he left the NIIA, his theoretical instinct only led to praxis and throwing of more thought-provoking questions to scholars to answer. For instance, his ‘Consultation Doctrine’ became a foreign policy legacy more than the Kissingerian style. At the second Foreign Policy Review Conference held at the NIPSS in 1986 (the first having been held in 1961), the then Foreign Minister Akinyemi was asked the question as to why Nigeria should be preaching the sermon of Africa as centrepiece of Nigeria’s foreign policy, as well as preaching the protection and defence of African and black dignity, on the one hand, but refusing to attend to the Euro-American mistreatment of Muammar Gaddafi of Libya, on the other hand.

Professor Akinyemi’s response was swift: no one should ever take Nigeria for granted. Whoever wants Nigeria’s support at any time must also learn how to first consult with Nigeria before swimming in the oceans of troubles. When Egypt had security problems with Israel and Nigeria had to strain her diplomatic ties with Israel, Egypt never bothered to carry Nigeria along when she went back to sign the Camp David accords with US President Jimmy Carter, Egyptian President Anwar Sadat, and Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin, to settle her dispute with Israel. Consequently, in the eyes of Professor Bolaji Akinyemi, there was the need to consult first with Nigeria if Nigeria’s entente, solidarity, and support was to be expected. This is what is generally referred to as ‘Consultation Doctrine’ in Nigeria’s Foreign policy.

It is against this background that the making of the Concert of Medium Powers (CMP) should also be explained and understood. Professor Akinyemi wanted Nigeria to be an effective regional leader, especially becoming a powerful force in her region. He strongly believes in consultation in addressing international questions. He convened a conference of Algeria, Argentina, Austria, Zimbabwe, Brazil, Egypt, India, Indonesia, Malaysia, Mexico, Senegal, Sweden, Switzerland, Venezuela, and Yugoslavia in 1987. With Nigeria the Convener, the Concert comprised 17 members. They met with a view to help consolidate international peace and security by promoting confidence-building among states. This effort fell within the framework of Middle Power Diplomacy.

As we noted in this column (vide ‘Academy of International Affairs and Nigeria’s Foreign Policy of 4-Ds: Objective, Agenda, or Framework? thisdaylive.com), the CMP was conceived in 1987 to initially serve as a consultation forum on global questions. The invitation extended to the 16 countries was largely based on the consideration that the countries were regional influential and medium powers on their own right. But for fears that the invited members would be seen as seeking to confront the super, or the great, powers, the name had to be changed to Lagos Forum. The CMP therefore entered into désuétude only to be resurrected in the format of an Academy of International Affairs (AIA), which he founded in 2022, to seek a just and equitable world order. He is the President of the AIA. 

Apart from the CMP enabling the opportunity to share ideas and sustaining Nigeria’s leadership as a regional influential, there is a special legacy he also left behind: the Technical Aid Corps Scheme (TACS), which was created by Decree No. 27 of January 1987 and signed into law in January 1993. A directorate was established to implement the law. Two major dynamics of the TACS were the official recognition by the United Nations in 1961 of the need to have a UN Volunteers’ Service and the much interest of the developing countries in the service when it was eventually established in 1970. 

Believing that domestic economic problems should not prevent Nigeria from acting well internationally, Professor Akinyemi came up with the TACS. Nigerian scholars and professionals were sent to foreign countries in need to help them. The scheme is still being sustained. Today, a new pillar, Strategic Autonomy, is being constructed to further project Nigeria internationally. The TACS remains the external dimension while the domestic foundation is now strategic autonomy towards which the main stakeholders, particularly the NIIA, should begin to work. 

NIIA and Nigeria’s Strategic Autonomy

The NIIA, even with Professor Bolaji Akinyemi, cannot but still have ‘critical challenges’ to address. First is the need to help restore the Institute’s old good image as a centre for brainstorming activities. The Bolaji Akinyemi years placed emphasis on academic research and institutional freedom but emphasis shifted thereafter from one Director-General to the other. This can be so but should never be allowed to undermine the pursuit of academic excellence. The NIIA must always be at par with leading research counterparts like the Chatham House after which the NIIA is patterned, and the Council on Foreign Relations with which the NIIA partners. 

The NIIA Governing Council, under the chairmanship of General Ike  Omar  Sanda Nwachukwu, completely bastardised the Institute by introducing a manu militari approach in the governance of the NIIA. By asking one ambassador to deputise for him in his absence, and even inciting a Research Fellow against the Chief Executive of the Institute, General Nwachukwu had his good name, integrity and all that he achieved in terms of decency completely tainted. The General Nwachukwu Governing Council was directly intervening in the day-to-day running of the Institute, and even, most unfortunately, laid a foundation for the appointment of Council Professors rather than NIIA appointed Professors. 

Under General Nwachukwu, there were two categories of professors: NIIA assessed and promoted professors, on the one hand, and Governing Council-assisted professors, on the other hand. This was most unfortunate. This should not have happened under normal circumstance.

Professor Akinyemi must therefore not allow this type of situation to come to live again. He knows better than I do in promoting the NIIA and its Governing Council. His experiences as a former NIIA Director General should not only be brought to bear, but as a former Foreign Minister, should also seek a strengthened nexus between the NIIA and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. There is no disputing the fact that the incumbent Director General, Professor Eghosa Emmanuel Osaghae, has made strenuous efforts to lift up the good image of the Institute from the old ruins, by particularly diversifying the activities of the Institute. However, efforts should be specifically made to ensure that the NIIA becomes greater than ever before, by looking at the need to name the various buildings, lawns, corners, etc., after the founding fathers as it was done under my administration as Director General. It is very befitting to honour people that matter in the life of the NIIA. The name of the First Director General, Ambassador Lawrence Fabunmi, Professor Akinyemi’s name, the name of the only surviving of the 12 Foreign Policy Disciples, Chief Phillip Asiodu, etc., should be inscribed on the stones, walls, etc., and should be self-story telling visiting guests arrive at the Institute. 

Additionally, the professional associations dealing with foreign policy should be made to play major roles. The Association of Retired Career Ambassadors (ARCAN) should be able to meet frequently and exchange ideas with the NIIA Research Fellows in order to marry theory with praxis. The same should apply to the Academy of International Affairs and the Society for International Relations (SIRA). The need for diversified schools of thought to pave the way for evolving a grand foreign policy strategy and strategic autonomy is a desideratum. It should be the ultimate objective and thrust, aimed at containment of the impediments. 

Without doubt, strategic autonomy is the capacity and capability to act independently in international relations without the mainmise of any foreign power. It is about self-reliance vis-à-vis global governance. Self-reliance requires a vibrant economy, self-confident and strong military, strengthening patriotism, dint of hard work, and innovative and shared determination to be great and making Nigeria to be second to none in global rating.

The first agenda to adopt in achieving the purpose of strategic autonomy is to seek an understanding of how Nigeria is perceived in international relations. In other words, what is the place of Nigeria in the foreign policy calculations of the countries of the world, and particularly in the Francophone world? Besides, research at the NIIA should be country-specialised. A Research Fellow should not be studying or researching in general terms. There should be specialists and experts on specific countries. If any Minister is travelling out to any country of need and a background paper is needed, it should not take the Institute long time to provide one under normal circumstance. The Research Specialist in charge of the country to be visited should be simply instructed to provide an updated information on current developments in the country. This is why the NIIA was conceived as a special depository of knowledge and also partly why the NIIA is made a depository for all the agreements done by Nigeria. 

Most unfortunately, however, relationship between the NIIA and the Ministry of Justice is nothing to write home about. Efforts were made when I was the Director General of the NIIA to compile the agreements for record and chronological purposes. Not much could be achieved for reasons of force majeure. As a reservoir of knowledge, the Foreign Ministry must always ensure that it has research input into their decision-making processes. Relevant Research Fellows should be part of official trips for purposes of academic documentation and decision-taking processes. Research and academic input cannot but help objective-decisions on the basis of the situational reality in the world. Reports from our diplomatic missions, combined with research findings on a given country, will considerably help the purposes of strategic autonomy.

In this regard, the NIIA should be required to begin research on all Nigeria’s bilateral relations with the specific objective of investigating Nigeria in the foreign policy calculations of foreign countries. Making one country’s great is not and cannot be peculiar to any country of the world. It is common patrimony and not only the preserve of the United States of Donald Trump that is making much noise about it. Strategic autonomy is not simply about self-assertion and self-reservation, but a major expressway to greatness, which Foreign Minister Tuggar is now trying to construct

Secondly, the NIIA has to address the diplomacy of 4-Ds as new pillars for achieving the objectives of strategic autonomy as a new foreign policy thrust. For instance, at the level of democracy, which type of democracy can be suitable to ensuring that Nigeria is self-reliant or strategically autonomous without being isolated? Is it liberal democracy or constitutional democracy? Is it defensive democracy, that limits some rights and freedoms in order to make existence secure? Is it participatory or deliberative democracy? Should Nigeria have a federal and presidential republic or representative democracy? 

When a choice is made on the type of democracy desired by the people, what are the definienda of the choice for ensuring Nigeria’s strategic autonomy? What does Nigeria’s demography or biggest population in Africa imply for the quest for strategic autonomy? Is democracy required in building a strong and dependable military? How do we reconcile the Freedom Act with the exigencies of national security? What are the roles expected to be played by the media in this regard? What about the relationship between National Security Strategy and Nigeria’s Strategic Autonomy agenda? 

In all these, what roles should the Nigerian Diaspora be playing beyond simply being a source of foreign exchange earnings? Is there anything wrong in creating a Diaspora Studies Unit in the NIIA to also work in tandem with the NIDCOM (Nigerians in Diaspora Commission)? Has the National Bureau of Statistics (NBS) which analyses collected data on the socio-economic of the country, no role to play in the quest for strategic autonomy? Surely it has. The NBS must provide a physiological ex-ray of Nigeria’s strategic autonomy on regular basis, since we are all agreed that health is wealth. Again, where do we put the idea of a ‘Black Bomb’ spoken about by Professor Bolaji Akinyemi and meant to make Nigeria and Africa respectable? These are some of the challenges before the NIIA Council and the Director General of the Institute.

Most unfortunately, however, for people seeking appointment as Board or Council Member, the NIIA is not good and ideal for their money-making. It is only a place for international respect, dignity of purpose, and critical thinking. Many scholars who sought to work there as if it is a playground, ended up being disappointed and not even staying there for two years. Certificate cheating people ran away before being pursued. It is therefore no surprise that politicians hardly like being appointed to the NIIA Governing Council. Only patriotic people, seriously-minded scholars enjoy the Institute. This is why the returning of Professor Bolaji Akinyemi is quite interesting. In fact, it is more interesting in light of the returning of Nigeria to the African Union’s Political, Peace and Security Council with the re-election of Ambassador Bankole Adeoye, an astute diplomatist, whose commitment to Nigeria and the African Union has been helpful. The complementary and dogged campaigns of Foreign Minister Tuggar also partly explain his re-election. It is this type of unflinching commitment that is now required at the level of the NIIA Governing Council and the entire Nigerian people to help sow the seed of Strategic Autonomy, grow and germinate the seeds, and collectively ensure that Nigeria is made strategically autonomous and greater, as what Nigeria needs today is a foreign policy grand strategy that will make Nigeria second to none.